SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(SC) 72

B. R. GAVAI, B. V. NAGARATHNA
BAHARUL ISLAM – Appellant
Versus
INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Harin P Raval, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay R Hegde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Adeel Ahmed, AOR Mr. Raja Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Piyush Sachdev, Adv. Ms. Oindrila Sen, Adv. Mr. Md Sharuk Ali, Adv. Mr. Raghav Gupta, Adv. Ms. Shreya, Adv. Ms. Shrestha Narayan, Adv. Mr. Aditya Pathak, Adv. Mr. Satish Kumar, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Shivam Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Singh, Adv. Mr. Deep Prabhu, Adv. Ms. Shaswati Parhi, Adv. Mr. Manish Kumar, AOR Mr. Gagan Gupta, AOR Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR Mr. Arnav Singh Deo, Adv. Mr. Deepayan Dutta, Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Sharma, AOR Mr. Dhawal Mohan, Adv. Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv. Mr. Paranjay Tripathi, Adv. Mr. K.M. Nataraj, Ld. ASG Mr. Vatsal Joshi, Adv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa, Adv. Mr. Sharathj Nambiar, ADv. Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anuj S. Udupa, ADv. Mr. Nakul Chengappa K.K., ADv. Mr. Chitransh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. Ananga Bhattacharyya, AOR Mr. V.K. Kanna, Adv. Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Akhileshwar Jha, Adv. Ms. Niharika Dwivedi, Adv. Ms. Shweta Sand, Adv. Mr. Narendra Pal Sharma, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Chawla, Adv. Mr. Ravish Kumar Goyal, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

NAGARATHNA, J.

INDEX

Sl. No.

Particulars

1.

Brief facts of the case

2.

Bird’s Eye View of the controversy

3.

Submissions on behalf of the appellants

4.

Arguments on behalf of R-1

5.

Arguments on behalf of R-7

6.

Submissions on behalf of the State of Assam

7.

Points for consideration

8.

Constitutional Scheme

9.

Contentions on behalf of the UOI

10.

Interplay between Entry 66 of List 1 and Entry 25 of List III

11.

Relevant provisions of Indian MEDICAL COUNCIL ACT , 1956

12.

Relevant provisions of Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act , 2004

13.

A comparative table and analysis of the provisions of the IMC Act, 1956 and the Assam Act

14.

Triology of cases

15.

Conclusions:

Leave granted.

2. In these appeals, the appellants have assailed the legality and correctness of the order dated 30.10.2014 p


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top